Buff Swashbuckling?

[Kaoklai]

Buff all 1h damage slightly.  Apply equivalent damage malus when used with a shield.  Also, what Saul said.   

I'd take 1h animations over 2h if I could have identical weapon stats both ways and I believe it's clear most people would as well.

I seriously doubt that's true.   

Anyways, one of the best things about M&B is that the weapon types are unique by virtue of their animations and you can always leverage the unique qualities of those differences into an advantage. A Good Player recognizes this and can do well with all of them.  But just because you do well with them personally does not mean that change isn't warranted.  The old standby of those who would oppose buffing 1h, is that you can use a shield at the same time.  To be sure, a shield is a tremendous advantage and it's associated costs in skill points and speed reduction are well balanced.  However, not everyone who wants to use 1h weapons wants to use a shield as well.  Since the prevailing argument against buffing 1h is the utility of a shield, only buffing 1h when not using a shield seems reasonable.  To all morons, saying "swashbuckling isn't a class" is a nonargument (from an historical perspective as well). 

the entire concept of a 'one handed weapon', pretty much dictates that you are always able to use a shield with it.

In concept, yes; in implementation, no.  To use a shield requires an investment of skill points that could go elsewhere. 

Frankly, it's not a huge deal to me either way.  I just think that 1h no shield has enough going against it (less damage, less reach, stunned all the time, superiority/inferiority of animations is subjective) to warrant a slight buff. 

[BarBeQ]

my old friend

[Macropus]

To all morons, saying "swashbuckling isn't a class" is a nonargument (from an historical perspective as well).

Funny, because I judged considering historical perspective mainly. What I call a "class" is a type of warrior that really existed at that specific time. Seriously, did someone use just a onehanded sword in medieval battle? I don't think so.
Ninjas weren't participating in medieval battles either, but we're not crying for a buff, because it's our own choise to make the game harder to play, and so is swashbuckling.

[Bobthehero]

Oh here we go with the ''We're ninja, we nerf ourselves more than anyone, go us we're the best thing since sliced bread'' wanking, wondered where I'd go.

Edit: You're still a 2 hander, Swashbuckling is a thing of its own, its not a 2h, its 1h, but there's no shield, so its not a shielder either, I think there's enough differences to warrant the title of ''class'' especially since there's more people playing it now than there used to.

[//saxon]

Saxon, you are also cav right? Which hardly makes your k/d representative for being a swashbuckler, but that was actually exactly my k/d as a swashbuckler. Oh and Kafein and Bob, stop pretending that 1h animations are bad, they are amazing.

i got to lvl 33 as cav and respeced to 1h no shield its what i always do when i reach lvl 33.

[Macropus]

Oh here we go with the ''We're ninja, we nerf ourselves more than anyone, go us we're the best thing since sliced bread'' wanking, wondered where I'd go.

No, just an example of what classes are not supposed to be as effective as other "legit" classes. Ninjas are UP, swashbuckling is UP, and it's not something that needs to be changed.

Edit: You're still a 2 hander, Swashbuckling is a thing of its own, its not a 2h, its 1h, but there's no shield, so its not a shielder either, I think there's enough differences to warrant the title of ''class'' especially since there's more people playing it now than there used to.

I don't call swashbuckling a separate class because a shielder can do all the same if he spawns without shield, so the only difference is few skillpoints which is not much really.

[Bobthehero]

He'd cease to be a shielder, just like a swashbuckler would stop to be a swashbuckler when he picks up a shield or uses a 2h sword.

[BADPLAYER_old2]

Change kicks back to how they were and 1h is completely fine. I'd go as far to say as with old kicks, 1hander is the strongest class in duels if you are good at it, but also the hardest one to be good at.

I really dislike the new kicks though with 1h, and it's the fault of all the bad 1handers complaining about them that they got changed. Good job on making your class worse scrubs.

[Bobthehero]

Shielders*

Not 1h without a shield

[BADPLAYER_old2]

Shielders*

Not 1h without a shield

I was talking about 1h without shield.

[Tydeus]

This class argument is dumb. There's a simple answer, here it is:

It's not a class. It isn't considered one from a dev/balance perspective. That is, it isn't developed for. There are no 1h-no shield mechanics implemented to buff these characters. You can call it what you want, but right now, it's not even considered a balance issue. It's just a player intentionally gimping their character. Any advantages you gain by not using a shield are there as a by product of some preexisting system, such as the increased effective block angle.

That being said, I've personally always loved 1h no shield, that's probably why one of my favorite builds is 1h+throwing. It's just about the best way to make 1h no shield effective. As 1h, you lack reach; forcing your opponent to chase you or eat a war dart, is an easy way to level the playing field.

Nudges are intriguing in that they open the door for several possibilities. I wonder if Urist can be convinced to take another look at these.

[Kaoklai]

Seriously, did someone use just a onehanded sword in medieval battle? I don't think so.

Uh, yes they did. With the development of plate, men at arms quite frequently fought with a one handed weapon and no shield.  Obviously it was also quite common outside of pitched battles (which cRPG battles hardly resemble) before and after that time as well.  I only mentioned history to preempt the retards who care so much about it; turns out all I did was reel in the misinformed. 

There are no 1h-no shield mechanics implemented to buff these characters.

Yeah, that's why I suggested there be one. 





Tydeus complains about being level 35 21/24 2h and having to use mighty morningstars in strat battles because they "don't fit his build."  That is all. 

[Sandersson Jankins]

I play 1h without shield, as 27-15, 1 IF 9PS, 5 ATH, 5WM. I get better scores and am consistently more effective using this build over anything else. I don't feel that anything NEEDS to be done to 1h without shield, especially considering that it would affect a VERY small portion of c-rpg players.

Funny, because I judged considering historical perspective mainly. What I call a "class" is a type of warrior that really existed at that specific time. Seriously, did someone use just a onehanded sword in medieval battle? I don't think so.
Ninjas weren't participating in medieval battles either, but we're not crying for a buff, because it's our own choise to make the game harder to play, and so is swashbuckling.

Unfortunately, a historical perspective is rather poor to use in this mod since warfare varied heavily between regions and periods of time. If we're trying to use conventional Western European warfare of centuries past, then we'd have plenty of people using one-handed weapons without shields. Why? Because heavily armoured knights were very unlikely to be killed outright during actual combat. They'd be incapacitated or otherwise wounded/exhausted and dispatched with daggers or picks while on the ground, in a very nasty executioner's fashion.

Of course, the majority of soldiers in armies from this period would have been poor levies with little armour using pole-arm type weapons, mostly spears.

Anyway, I find one-handed sans shield to be perfectly fine. The combos and feinting that you can pull off with this "class" are amazing. The low weapon weight of one-handed weapons allow for great movement speed since you aren't using a shield, meaning you can sacrifice agility for strength without moving slow as absolute cock.

[Tydeus]

I don't feel that anything NEEDS to be done to 1h without shield, especially considering that it would affect a VERY small portion of c-rpg players.

So because something currently isn't being played much, changes that would increase variety and player freedom shouldn't be implemented?

Anyway, I find one-handed sans shield to be perfectly fine. The combos and feinting that you can pull off with this "class" are amazing. The low weapon weight of one-handed weapons allow for great movement speed since you aren't using a shield, meaning you can sacrifice agility for strength without moving slow as absolute cock.

It's the weapon length, not the weight that makes the difference here, although shield weight truly does matter. But again, this is an advantage gained not because of an implemented mechanic meant to buff 1h+no shield, it simply comes naturally with the absence of a shield. It's equal for all shieldless melee.

Yeah, that's why I suggested there be one.

The statement wasn't in reply to anything you said, I'm not sure why you'd assume it was.

Tydeus complains about being level 35 21/24 2h and having to use mighty morningstars in strat battles because they "don't fit his build."  That is all.

Where build was meant to include play-style. And I'm stubborn, I don't care to adapt sometimes, even when I know it will result in increased effectiveness. Although, with the battle in question, I did adapt, I started using polearms that I had zero proficiency in and did much better. No 2her on my team was successful (unless you call almost having a 1:1 K:D successful). You have to realize that going on offense with a short weapon puts you at a disadvantage particularly when up against a cooperative and solid defense. Sure it can be done, but you need overwhelming pressure(it was raven/nh, there was little) otherwise your offense fails because you have to spend more time defending than attacking, among other things.

I don't mean to be a dick, but any suggestion that "all things are equal" in anything, let alone crpg, is really quite naive.

 Tydeus is level 34 by the way.

[Teeth]

There is in fact an advantage to using 1h without a shield. There are different modifiers to which extent weight of a weapon slows down your movement for the 1h, 1h/2h and 2h grouped weapons. 1h has the best modifier, which means that the weight of the weapon you use affects your movement least. With 1h having very low weight and low length, which affect your movement before the modifier above kicks in, you move quite fast with just a 1h.

The class is designed to be used with a 5-7 weight shield, remove that and you end up with a very fast class. 1h can sidestep and switch direction very fast compared to using a heavier, longer weapon of the 2h class. This is considerable to the extent that even though my preferred melee build is 21/21, for 1h without shield I went 24/18. I don't think there was much of a difference in speed between these builds, in fact footwork felt much easier to do with the swashbuckling one.

Also, blocking without a shield is instant and with a shield is not, but eh.